## Facts

- Donald D. Carroll, Jr. was indicted for murdering his wife and entered a general guilty plea; a bench trial was held to determine the degree of guilt.
- After marital conflict and a prolonged argument, Carroll retrieved a loaded pistol from a bedroom windowsill while his wife lay in bed facing away from him.
- Carroll shot his wife twice in the back of the head, killing her.
- He wrapped the body in a blanket, left it near a trash dump, took the children to his parents’ home, returned to work, and was arrested days later.
- At trial, Carroll offered evidence of good reputation and psychiatric testimony characterizing the killing as impulsive and not premeditated or intentional.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence supported a finding of first-degree murder rather than only second-degree murder.
2. Whether good-character evidence and psychiatric testimony that the killing was impulsive and not premeditated required the court to fix the degree of guilt no higher than second-degree murder.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the judgment fixing guilt at first-degree murder and imposing a life sentence.
- The evidence supported a finding of a willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing, including the retrieval of the gun and two shots to a vital area.
- Good-character evidence and psychiatric opinion testimony did not preclude the fact-finder from determining specific intent and premeditation from the circumstances and defendant’s conduct.

## Legal Principles

- Premeditation does not require any particular period of time; an intent to kill may be formed in a very brief interval if the killing is intentional, willful, deliberate, and premeditated.
- Specific intent to kill may be inferred from the intentional use of a deadly weapon on a vital part of the victim’s body, together with surrounding circumstances and reasonable inferences.
- The fact-finder may discount psychiatric testimony on intent or premeditation, particularly where it depends on the defendant’s account or conflicts with objective evidence of deliberate action and post-crime concealment.
- Good-character evidence is relevant and may create reasonable doubt in a close case, but it does not override strong evidence establishing intent and premeditation.

## Conclusion

The court upheld a first-degree murder determination where the defendant retrieved a firearm and fired two shots into a vital part of the victim, holding that premeditation can be formed in a very short time and that intent may be inferred from the manner of the killing despite favorable character evidence and psychiatric testimony describing the act as impulsive.


Commonwealth v. Carroll, 412 Pa. 525, 194 A.2d 911 (Pa. 1963)